From Epstein to tariffs: the strikes function as an attempt to hijack the global narrative and drown out domestic scandal with the thunder of cruise missiles
In 2003 the United States invaded Iraq without deciding whether it should. The George W Bush administration failed to ask whether the costs, risks and likely consequences of regime change justified the gamble. The result was tragedy – for Iraq, for the Middle East and for America.
Donald Trump’s attack on Iran now follows the same pattern – but with an even narrower logic of performative power. In the run-up to Iraq, Washington devoted enormous energy to planning the invasion. Almost no attention was given to the more important question: was war necessary, and could it realistically produce a stable political outcome?
Christopher S Chivvis is a senior fellow and director of the American Statecraft Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace